Strange Elections
With the U.S. Presidential election just one year from today, I thought I’d take this opportunity to reflect on some of the strangeness in our electoral past. Given the Hobson’s choice (in my view at least) in 2004 and the 2000 voting controversy, one would be forgiven for thinking that it is our recent past which has produced the most strange presidential elections.

In fact, the 2000 election was the fourth time that a candidate became president without receiving a plurality of the popular vote. This also happened in the elections of 1876 and 1888, and in the election of 1824, John Quincy Adams received a plurality in neither the popular nor the electoral vote. Adams was selected president by a vote in the House of Representatives.
But my vote for the most strange presidential election in history must go to the election of 1872…
Republican incumbent, Ulysses S. Grant, sullied by a series of corruption scandals and the general incompetence of his administration, nevertheless won the Republican nomination.

But a dissatisfied faction of the Republican party formed the new Liberal Republican Party. Charles Francis Adams, both son and grandson of former presidents, lost the nomination of this new party to New York Tribune editor, Horace Greeley.
Greeley, a onetime Grant supporter, was a social idealist whose frumpy appearance, eccentric habits and odd mannerisms made him an object of ridicule.

In his editorial career, Greeley insisted that the word “news” was plural. He once cabled a Tribune reporter: “ARE THERE ANY NEWS?” The employee cabled back: “NOT A NEW”. Yet Greeley won the nomination of the Liberal Republican Party against Adams with Benjamin Gratz Brown as his running mate. Brown did not help the campaign much, drinking heavily throughout and making a series of gaffes during summer – such as trying to cook a watermelon at a public picnic.
The Democrats saw no viable alternative. Incredibly, they also nominated the Greeley/Brown ticket. This seemed to open a floodgate of minor contenders such as free-thinking suffragette, Victoria Woodhull (although she herself couldn’t vote at the time), her running mate and former slave, Frederick Douglass, Bourbon Democrat Charles O’Conor and the Prohibition Party’s James Black.
Strangest of all, perhaps, was millionaire George Francis Train. Train, an eccentric shipping magnate and world traveler was supposedly one of the inspirations for Jules Verne’s Around the World in Eighty Days (though Train’s trip only took 67 days).

Train ran as an independent and promised to make himself dictator if elected. He also charged admission fees to his speeches and became the only candidate to turn a profit from his candidacy. His showing in the polls was negligible, unsurprisingly, as was the Woodhull/Douglass ticket’s.
Greeley, reeling from public ridicule and personal grief (his wife wife had died on October 30th), was crushed by Grant in the polls and also lost his editorial position at the New York Tribune. Greeley’s mental and physical health swiftly declined and he died only three weeks after the election – before the electoral votes were cast. Consequently, the few electoral votes Greeley earned went to Brown instead.
Thus Ulysses S. Grant was elected to a second term as President of the United States in what might have been the strangest election of all time.

If I’d had you as a history teacher back in high school, maybe my grades wouldn’t have been so low.
Wow! I didn’t know any of this.
Let’s hope we’ve learned how to vote (here in Florida) by Election Day.
Hey Art!
i you vote for me i promise to make myself dictator too!
seems like a good plan, eh?
I have never heard of this either! Interesting!!!
The one good thing about the election of 2000 is that it did convince voters that voting is important. But it also reiterated that the candidate with the most corporate muscle will win. Gore ran a lousy campaign, but he should have been president.
Also, Ulysses S. Grant is believed to be the worst president of all time. Then I suppose the tie is between Bush and Warren Harding. Grant drank his way through his presidency; Bush may be an obstinant jerk, but he does work, even if we hate the result.
I saw your comment over at Scarlet’s and had to come see what sensitive man said that—I thought your evaluation of the way things are with people today was very true and extermely inciteful…
This is a fascinating post and I was not familiar with most of the information in it….I will be back to read more….!
Vicki – I once planned to be a history teacher. Then I regained my senses
Scarlet – We can hope for the rest of the states too. I am increasingly dismayed by the collective intelligence of our electorate.
Thank you Susan.
Enemy – So tell us, what do you really think of Bush
Jay – I didn’t mean to pass you over. You somehow ended up in the spam list. Sorry. But sure, I’d vote you in as dictator… of Mongolia
Old Old Lady of the Hills – Your comment went into moderation too. Sorry. But thank you for the kind comment. I can already hear my wife laughing when she reads that I am sensitive
US political history is quite interesting indeed. I didn’t know most of the facts you mentioned here… but I’m growing very interested in US politics (dont we all… this upcoming election is very weird in some ways !).
I would NEVER laugh at you, dear! I agree with the oldlady up there, you are a sensitive, soul.
Zhu – Yeah this election is going to interesting! Thanks.
Stacie – Awwww. Thank you.